Bashir Ahmad Parraypora Vs. ITO, Ward-3 (1), Srinagar

Parties Involved

Facts Summary

The assessee, Bashir Ahmad Parraypora, is in the business of running a small stationery shop in the Kashmir valley. During the financial year 2016-17, he deposited cash amounting to Rs. 23,00,165/- in his bank account, which included Rs. 10,70,000/- deposited during the demonetization period. In the absence of any return filed by the assessee and no response to notices issued under section 142(1) of the Act, the Assessing Officer completed the assessment ex parte under section 144 of the Act, determining the total income at Rs. 11,93,129/-. The assessee filed an appeal before the first appellate authority, which was dismissed in his absence. The assessee now appeals to the tribunal on the grounds of non-availability of opportunity for hearing and objections to the addition sustained under section 69A.…

Legal Issues

• 1. Condonation of delay in filing the appeal
• 2. Non-availability of opportunity for hearing
• 3. Objection to addition sustained under section 69A

Judgment Outcome

Decided in favour of Assessee.

Precedents Relied Upon

Similar Judgements

• Arjun Kumar Sah vs. ITO Ward-1(3), Vaishali

  Patna bench

• Shri. Devadass Suresh Vs. DCIT

  Bangalore benchAY 2017-18Allowed

• Islampur C.S. Shop 2

  Kolkata Bench benchAY 2017-2018Allowed

• Ranjeet Singh Vs. ITO, Ward-5(5), Patna

  Patna Bench at Kolkata benchAY 2017-18Partly Allowed

• Sayyad Javed Sayyad Khaja vs. ITO, Ward-1(1), Aurangabad

  Pune bench

• Income Tax Officer Vs. Hema Arora